> How about something like this? > > 300 TSC > 200 HPET > 200 CYCLONE > 100 ACPI > 050 PIT > 010 JIFFIES > > Then if the system has TSC issues (unsynced, cpufreq problems, etc), we The priority is fine, the problem is getting the decisions for when to fallback right. It is quite complicated to decide this, see the x86-64 time.c code for this. > can demote the TSC's priority to 50 and it will fall back nicely without > manual intervention. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- From: john stultz <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- References:
- Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- From: [email protected] (Parag Warudkar)
- Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- From: Parag Warudkar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- From: john stultz <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- From: Parag Warudkar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- From: john stultz <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] ptrace(2) single-stepping into signal handlers
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 3/4] new timeofday x86-64 arch specific changes (v. B1)
- Index(es):
 |